Such is an example of "Jaws" presumably. Good Point. But if I may, the issue about privacy and the way you framed it is perhaps not the whole issue. Anyone that goes to a public place has no expectation of privacy, certainly nothing like that which they are afforded in their home. I still have a problem understanding how anyone could have a problem with a consumer UAV in terms of privacy while in public. Might it be expected that these same people in their day to day life do things like take their kids to a mall for lunch and a movie. In a four hour trip as such to the mall do they have any idea how many cameras have captured their images - most of which with out their knowledge? Traffic Cameras, ATM's, all manner of stores' cameras, tons of other people catching them in their own selfies perhaps and not to mention their own phone which they have gleefully given permission for multiple apps to blab every detail and in some cases record some or part of what they do. But a drone? Oh well we have to regulate that.
And just to be clear, there is; or should be, a line between voyeurism and privacy. For instance what if I am out with my family and I want to take a picture of me with my wife and girls on the beach? If I take a picture and capture someone else in the picture, that is not an invasion of privacy - we are in public. On the other hand if someone seeks out an individual or individuals and begins to to follow and photograph - that is a whole different thing. The problem is we do not define it as such but there rules are on the book. Why not put a sign up that outlaws voyeurism - clearly define it and have a nice day.
Sorry, but the public perception of "Drones" has been well crafted and built very much like the perception that has all of academia worried about AI in the future. These same pen heads were the ones telling everyone that at the turn of the millennia, all forms of electronics would fail, computers would go dark, planes would fall out of the sky. Anyone remember all of that? The problem as I see it is we have a large portion of society that see no good use and in fact just the opposite - that drones are only for bad. Therefore outlawing them is good. And when we in the UAV community agree to any of it, we are essentially agreeing with the ideology (and that is what it is) that drones are bad.
It is a symbiotic relationship between the ill informed public and a growing bureaucracy that understand there is no power in the word "yes" ie, permission. The public is agitated and frightened by the boogie man and begs the state to intervene of their behalf - in the name of safety and protection of course; and the state obliges.
A perfect example of this insanity is the nationwide "Click it or Ticket" campaign aimed and getting more people to buckle up. Okay, thats well and good and on the surface it makes perfect sense. But then you have states like us here in Florida where the politicians have been lobbied to death to allow people to ride motorcycles without helmets. SO if you're in a car we care about you but on a bike we don't? No, the obvious answer is they are not doing for anyone's safety - their doing it for any number of reasons and using "Safety" as the PR campaign cause they know that works every time.
Sorry for the rantI am trying to bring a UAV program into our local Fire Department and the city council see "no valid reason at this time" I suppose they are prepping for the attack of the autonomous vacuum cleaners in 2022.
Indeed, we live in a society full of contradictions. There was an interesting article in a magazine I read recently that discussed how to help an irrational person see certain situations rationally. The gist of the article basically concluded that people, in general, tend to not be rational. That said, the challenge before us is to avoid falling into the same trap. Fortunately, there are rational people who have concluded UAVs are not inherently bad, hence, we still have lots of areas where they can be flown. The more advanced they become, however, the more the fear of those who do not understand them will likely bring about new restrictions. I think it is worth noting that Elon Musk, himself an architect of certain AI systems, has stated publically that AI presents a significant risk to us in the future. This is a guy who knows.
So what options do we have now? IMHO we enjoy the freedoms we have while we still have them. Railing against the irrational with rationality is a no-win proposition.
